The method used to analyze samples of pills found on a former correctional officer isn’t scientifically sound, an expert witness told Yukon Supreme Court on Friday.

Lab analyst Suzanne Perry testified all day on Friday during the third day of Michael Gaber’s trial.

The former correctional officer was charged on Dec. 26, 2013 with possession for the purpose of trafficking.

Last Wednesday, the court heard from the RCMP constable who seized 59 pills on Gaber that day.

The following day, Health Canada analyst Sarita Jaswal testified she determined during her analysis the pills contained methylphenidate, the active substance in Ritalin.

Methylphenidate is a schedule III drug under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Friday’s testimony came after defence lawyer David Tarnow attacked Jaswal’s procedure when analyzing the pill.

Throughout her testimony, Perry specifically took issue with two elements of the analysis Jaswal conducted.

First, the Health Canada analyst used a standard from 2004 to identify the sample.

Standards are known substances labs buy and then run through their own equipment to be later used for comparison. In this case, the lab purchased Ritalin in 2004 and ran it through their machines.

The standard used in this case wasn’t certified – a guarantee of purity – and these can be purchased for as little as $20, Perry told the court.

The other issue is that Jaswal visually compared the result of her analysis with the standard. The tests result in a graph with peaks at different times.

If similar peaks occur in the sample and the standard graphs, with a small margin of error, then it’s a match.

“I’m not certain I could do that, and I have 30 years of experience,” Perry said, when asked if she could come to the same conclusion using visual matching.

The international norm under which Health Canada labs are accredited, specifies there must be a certainty of 95 per cent or higher when analyzing drugs.

Jaswal testified she was 95 to 99 per cent certain of her analysis, but that only remains an opinion, Perry said.

The lab could have used NIST, an international database, she said, as they did to identify unknown results during a test-run.

In the graph obtained after running the crushed pill through the lab equipment, there is at least one unidentified substance, Perry noted.

Contaminants can affect other compounds present and the ability of the machine to detect them accurately, she said.

Contaminants also limit the amount of details shown on the graph.

Jaswal told the court she had to zoom in on the graph to do the visual match.

“The conclusions are not scientifically sound,” Perry said.

“It can’t be relied upon to identify the sample seized on Gaber.”

Jaswal, in cross-examination the day before, testified she did use a database but didn’t include the results in her report.

Ultimately, the Health Canada procedure dictates she makes her final determination using visual matching, Jaswal said.

In cross-examination, Crown prosecutor Eric Marcoux pointed out Jaswal followed the procedure and didn’t simply “eyeball” the results of the analysis.

“You’re after the procedure of the lab, not Jawal’s work,” Marcoux said.

“If she followed the procedure, at an ISO-accredited lab, how is that not good enough?” he asked, referring to the International Organization for Standardization.

“The (procedure) leaves it open for the lab to make bad decisions in some cases,” Perry said.

“The protocol applied to thousands of cases, should these analyses be reviewed?” Marcoux asked.

“I can’t guess,” Perry simply answered.

Perry, who now owns her own consulting company, used to work for the University of British Columbia lab that analyzed samples for companies and NGOs.

Before being recognized as an expert witness by Justice Ron Veale, Perry talked about her work at the lab, working for chemistry Nobel prize winner Michael Smith and teaching students.

Both parties are scheduled back for final submissions on March 7.